Not Counting Canadians: Canadians want independent environmental and public health standards

Canadians want independent environmental and public health standards

87% of Canadians agree that Canada should maintain the ability to set its own independent environmental, health and safety standards

of Canadians agree that Canada should maintain the ability to set its own independent environmental, health and safety standards, even if this might reduce cross-border trade opportunities with the United States.

So why is the Harper government committed, through the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), to a policy of regulatory harmonization with the United States where a cavalier approach to governing the behaviour of corporations prevails? “Is the sovereignty of Canada going to fall apart if we standardize the jellybean?” asked Harper dismissively at the SPP summit in Montebello, Quebec last August. But there is little mention of public health or the environment in subsequent regulatory discussions with the United States, and talk of “best practices” has already meant Canada adopting weaker U.S. practices.

Harper’s new consumer product safety legislation is far weaker than media reports claim and belies a soft spot for corporate priorities. The new rules – a tri-national initiative from the 2007 SPP summit – were drafted in cooperation with U.S. regulators. Actually, the Bush administration announced very similar product safety legislation to Harper’s in November 2007. At the heart of both systems is a reliance on industry reporting and monitoring, rather than independent government testing, and an emphasis on cleaning up the mess (to the environment or human lives) caused by bad products after the fact. They call this “risk management,” an about-face from the “precautionary principle” of better safe than sorry.

Also in Montebello, Harper signed a more concrete agreement on the regulation of toxics and other hazardous chemicals that also applies the “risk management” approach. Government regulators will only focus test the riskiest chemicals based on corporate data. The European Union has just announced a much stricter approach to regulating chemicals based on the precautionary principle – if a corporation can’t prove a product is safe, it can’t sell that product. Cooperating with Europe on this issue would result in higher standards, but Harper seems devoted to the “Montebello Agreement,” as the chemicals industry now fondly calls it.

A University of Toronto study this winter found that Canadians are not getting enough Vitamin D. In fact, we should be taking double the amount currently recommended by Health Canada, especially during colder months. Despite calls from the Canadian Cancer Society and other groups to raise the recommended level from 400 to 1,000 international units, Health Canada is committed to a policy of harmonizing food and drug standards with the United States, which uses the lower level. A Food and Agriculture SPP working group is sorting out the details.

Regulatory harmonization has also already meant higher pesticide levels in our food and has the potential to lower safety standards for children’s car seats, among other manufacturing standards. Based on our poll results, Canadians would clearly prefer independent standards that meet or exceed the best in the world rather than SPP harmonization.

Facebook del.icio.us DiggIt Reddit